Free speech the, very foundation of any free society, is definitely under attack in Western Europe. To speak the truth is now a crime in some western European nations. Is there now an “intellectual terrorism” afoot ?

See the material below concerning what is happening in the Netherlands to Geert Wilders, a man who speaks the truth, but is now on trial for doing just that because it offends Muslims. When truth and justice part ways the result can be only one thing: injustice.

This is a preview of what will certainly come to America given a little time because it is increasingly considered off limits for anyone to speak out against religion - especially Islam.

Geert Wilders, the Dutch far-Right MP, has demanded that his race hate trial should hear evidence from the fanatic who used the Koran to justify killing the director of an anti-Islamic film.

It marked an incendiary opening to the landmark case that has divided the Netherlands over the limits of freedom. Mr Wilders, 46, who is accused of incitement and discrimination, asked for 18 witnesses to be called in his defence, including Mohammed Bouyeri, the man who stabbed and shot Theo Van Gogh in an Amsterdam street in 2004.

The Van Gogh murder left a deep scar on the national conscience. It helped to change the mood of tolerance of Islam, and boosted Mr Wilders’s popularity.

Mr Wilders, whose Party for Freedom came second in the European elections last summer, faces a 70-page charge sheet covering five counts of breaking Dutch law in more than 100 public statements — for example, by likening the Koran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf and calling for an end to the “Islamic invasion”. He could be fined or jailed if convicted.
Related Links

* Far-right MP on trial for attacks on Islam

* Protests force anti-Muslim to retreat

* Anti-Islamic Dutch MP to visit UK within days

The alleged offences include Mr Wilders’s film Fitna, which shows images of 9/11 and beheadings interspersed with verses from the Koran. It ends with a clip of the controversial Danish cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad.

At the opening day of the trial the prosecution objected to the request to hear from Bouyeri, and the panel of four judges adjourned until February 3 to consider which witnesses to call. “This case is about more than Mr Wilders,” Bram Moszkowicz, his lawyer, told the court. “It touches us all. It is such an important and principled question that could have far-reaching consequences.”

Mr Moszkowicz argued that the witnesses Mr Wilders wanted to call would prove that what he said was not simply inoffensive but true. He suggested that Bouyeri, a dual Moroccan-Dutch national, would be key to the case because he was a fervent Muslim who carried a Koran during his trial and defended his crime by claiming that Islam permitted violence against unbelievers.

The prosecution countered that, unlike the other witnesses — mostly academics and theologians — Bouyeri was not an authority and should not be called.

About 200 supporters of Mr Wilders travelled to Amsterdam District Court from as far as Germany to hold up placards declaring that free speech was under attack by Islam and political correctness. Eighty packed into the public gallery, applauding Mr Wilders and his lawyer.

Ulrich Rosendahl, 46, an engineer who took the day off work to travel from Cologne to support Mr Wilders, held up a banner outside the court which read: “Wilders does as \ Chaplin did. He attacks fascism — Islamo.”

Mr Rosendahl said: “I support what he says and I know he has lived under police protection for many years and I think that he pays a high price to fight for freedom of speech.”

Mr Moszkowicz said that Mr Wilders had a mandate as an MP to speak out against what he saw as the Islamisation of the Netherlands. Birgit van Roessel, for the prosecution, said that “expressing his opinion in the media or through other channels is not part of an MP’s duties.” She said that MPs had immunity for only what they said inside parliament.

About ExChristian.Net

The ExChristian.Net blog exists for the express purpose of encouraging those who have decided to leave Christianity behind. It is not an open challenge for Christians to avenge what they perceive as an offense against their religious beliefs. Please read the site disclaimer prior to posting comments.

When Truth Is A Crime

By Dealdoctor --

Free speech the, very foundation of any free society, is definitely under attack in Western Europe. To speak the truth is now a crime in some western European nations. Is there now an “intellectual terrorism” afoot ?

See the material below concerning what is happening in the Netherlands to Geert Wilders, a man who speaks the truth, but is now on trial for doing just that because it offends Muslims. When truth and justice part ways the result can be only one thing: injustice.

This is a preview of what will certainly come to America given a little time because it is increasingly considered off limits for anyone to speak out against religion - especially Islam.

Geert Wilders, the Dutch far-Right MP, has demanded that his race hate trial should hear evidence from the fanatic who used the Koran to justify killing the director of an anti-Islamic film.

It marked an incendiary opening to the landmark case that has divided the Netherlands over the limits of freedom. Mr Wilders, 46, who is accused of incitement and discrimination, asked for 18 witnesses to be called in his defence, including Mohammed Bouyeri, the man who stabbed and shot Theo Van Gogh in an Amsterdam street in 2004.

The Van Gogh murder left a deep scar on the national conscience. It helped to change the mood of tolerance of Islam, and boosted Mr Wilders’s popularity.

Mr Wilders, whose Party for Freedom came second in the European elections last summer, faces a 70-page charge sheet covering five counts of breaking Dutch law in more than 100 public statements — for example, by likening the Koran to Hitler’s Mein Kampf and calling for an end to the “Islamic invasion”. He could be fined or jailed if convicted.
Related Links

* Far-right MP on trial for attacks on Islam

* Protests force anti-Muslim to retreat

* Anti-Islamic Dutch MP to visit UK within days

The alleged offences include Mr Wilders’s film Fitna, which shows images of 9/11 and beheadings interspersed with verses from the Koran. It ends with a clip of the controversial Danish cartoon of the Prophet Muhammad.

At the opening day of the trial the prosecution objected to the request to hear from Bouyeri, and the panel of four judges adjourned until February 3 to consider which witnesses to call. “This case is about more than Mr Wilders,” Bram Moszkowicz, his lawyer, told the court. “It touches us all. It is such an important and principled question that could have far-reaching consequences.”

Mr Moszkowicz argued that the witnesses Mr Wilders wanted to call would prove that what he said was not simply inoffensive but true. He suggested that Bouyeri, a dual Moroccan-Dutch national, would be key to the case because he was a fervent Muslim who carried a Koran during his trial and defended his crime by claiming that Islam permitted violence against unbelievers.

The prosecution countered that, unlike the other witnesses — mostly academics and theologians — Bouyeri was not an authority and should not be called.

About 200 supporters of Mr Wilders travelled to Amsterdam District Court from as far as Germany to hold up placards declaring that free speech was under attack by Islam and political correctness. Eighty packed into the public gallery, applauding Mr Wilders and his lawyer.

Ulrich Rosendahl, 46, an engineer who took the day off work to travel from Cologne to support Mr Wilders, held up a banner outside the court which read: “Wilders does as \ Chaplin did. He attacks fascism — Islamo.”

Mr Rosendahl said: “I support what he says and I know he has lived under police protection for many years and I think that he pays a high price to fight for freedom of speech.”

Mr Moszkowicz said that Mr Wilders had a mandate as an MP to speak out against what he saw as the Islamisation of the Netherlands. Birgit van Roessel, for the prosecution, said that “expressing his opinion in the media or through other channels is not part of an MP’s duties.” She said that MPs had immunity for only what they said inside parliament.

Search Our Entire Network:

Help Keep Ex-C Online

You really don't think maintaining a site like this costs nothing, do you? Give a hand! Click the "Donate" button above to give one-time or recurring monthly donations. Or, choose one of the recurring donation options below and click the "Subscribe" button.